House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-12-03 Daily Xml

Contents

POKER MACHINE LICENCES

Ms THOMPSON (Reynell) (15:30): I also wish to extend my good wishes to all those members who are voluntarily departing this place, as well as to those we will not see again.

Members interjecting:

Ms THOMPSON: Well, enjoy your new life. I would like to continue with the contribution I made on 19 November about some important issues that have been tested in the Supreme Court recently. At that time I pointed out that the court, in a decision of 3 November, had upheld the importance of club licences being used by and for licensed clubs and of pub licences being used by and for licensed pubs, and there not being unfair competition between the two groups.

Unfortunately, the victim of some aspirations on behalf of a group of hoteliers has been the Hackham Community Sports and Social Club, which is rightly distressed about the fact that, because of the decision that reinforces the roles of clubs and pubs, it will not be able to, effectively, withdraw its licence or utilise it in a way that, under the management agreement that they reached with Club Management Services, the courts have found significantly benefits the hoteliers and removes control of the licence and the club from Hackham Community Sports and Social Club.

The club has written to me expressing its distress about this decision, and suggesting that I do not support clubs or sport in the area. I think it is therefore important to make it very clear for the record that, in my objections to the club licence transfer, I was supported by many sporting and social clubs in the area. I point out that the South Adelaide Football Club was a major objector, and that two of the key witnesses in support of my submission about the nature of club-run facilities were Greg Beeching, the President of the Morphett Vale Football Club, and John O'Hare, Treasurer of the Workingmen's Club.

It is very unfortunate that the Hackham Community Sports and Social Club finds itself with its hopes dashed. I sympathise greatly with the club and have asked council, which owns the property the club currently operates, to assist it in dealing with the difficulties it faces. The club currently operates at a deficit and has unsecured loans of more than $80,000. One can see from this that it was looking for another answer when it found itself struggling a little. I think most of us know that all clubs go through cycles when they are not as profitable as they have been at other times. New management committees often come in, but ways for renewal are found within the club. This club looked outside but, unfortunately for the club, that was inappropriate.

However, the letter I received unfortunately does reflect the tone of some of the letters received by other objectors in this case, and I would like to thank the objectors who received an inch wad of papers telling them that they could no longer be represented by me because the matter was going to the Supreme Court, and that they would need to engage counsel themselves or withdraw. Well, I was given leave to represent them, but many people felt very intimidated by that. The story I like the most is that of the quite elderly objector who looked at these things and decided that their place was on the top of the wardrobe underneath the Christmas decorations.

I would like to express my thanks to all those who had the courage to go forward to the Supreme Court as objectors to this case, even when costs were being claimed against them. I particularly thank the witnesses, none of whom, to my knowledge, have ever been in a witness box before, but they came forward on behalf of their community, and the people who came to court every day to show their support for what we as a community were trying to do. I especially thank my assistant, Penny Gregory, who suddenly found herself acting as an instructing solicitor rather than a personal assistant. Her dedication indicates what many of us have from our staff every day. Thank you.